543 
ON THE ANATOMY OF DREGS. 
Vcitions were repeated and confirmed by others in this country; indeed, speaking- 
from our own experience, there was so little beyond the most ordinary care re¬ 
quired in manipulation in order to obtain the most satisfactory evidence of the cor¬ 
rectness of the views laid down, that w^e should not have supposed it possible that a 
doubt could have arisen in the matter. Notwithstanding, we find as follows, at 
page 60 of the ‘Atlas:’—“The crystals which Howard figures are not found in that 
condition in the bark, but are first produced through chemical treatment of the 
preparation; ” and it is even more surprising to find that another German writer. 
Dr. Phoebus, seems to have only partially succeeded in his search for them. 
Failure can only be attributed to one of two causes,—either the directions for 
preparing the sections have not been attended to, or else the bark operated upon 
has not been a good specimen.^ The crystals are hard tufts of considerable 
size, enclosed in intercellular cavities proper to them, and may be observed by 
any one who will take the trouble to select a good rich sample of Red Bark. 
It is necessarj’- to dissolve out some of the colouring matter which obscures 
them, by boiling for a few moments in weak potash, but the theory that this 
process should produce the crystals in question is manifestly absurd. Although 
these appearances are, so far as at present known, confined to the bark of 
three or four species, we have in others a somewhat analogous deposit in an 
amorphous form sufficiently marked to afford confirmatory evidence. 
We cannot leave the subject without lamenting the unaccountable confusion 
which exists in Dr. Berg’s separation of the species yielding the various com¬ 
mercial Peruvian barks, and pointing out a few of the errors into which he has 
fallen. It would be an easier task if any authority were given for many of the 
statements, which are set down as though they were acknowledged facts, with¬ 
out evidence and without argument. For example, we are told that the produce 
of C. scrohiciilata is known in commerce (amongst many other names) as 
“ Huamalies Bark,” and as “ Uritusinga suberosa” Bark. Now the Uritusinga 
tree, if we may judge from plants which have been raised from the seeds col¬ 
lected in the mountain of Uritusinga, is the true C. officinalis^ Linn., wdiich 
yields the Pale Bark of commerce. What “ China Uritusinga suberosa” is we 
cannot pretend to say, and there is certainly no such thing now known in com¬ 
merce as “ Huamalies Bark.” Again (p. 64), “ Cinchona rubra dura” is stated 
to belong to a distinct species from “ Cinchona rubra suberosa,” in spite of the 
evidence of Spruce, who states that the difference depends on meteorological 
causes,—that the one is obtained from the tree in sheltered, shaded localities, 
the other from the same, grown in situations where it is exposed to sunshine, 
wind, and showers. “ Quina fina de Loxa”is stated to be derived from C. 
glantluUfera^ but no authority is given for the assertion. The bark of C. Uri~ 
tusinga is said to be known in commerce, when old, amongst other names as 
“ Calisaya empedermida,” which, apart from the fact that old Loxa bark is not 
known in commerce at all, is incorrect. In addition to which, the significance 
of the Spanish word empedernida (hardened and wrinkled like an old man’s 
hand) is entirely lost by the bad spelling. Some varieties of Pitaya bark are 
said to come from Chiquinquera; as the two localities are about six hundred 
miles apart, one might as well talk of digging Newcastle coals in Cornwall. 
Anomalies such as these might be quoted at much greater length, and they de¬ 
tract seriously from the value of the letterpress portion of the book ; but enough 
has been said to put students, using the work, on their guard respecting this 
sort of information. 
* Is it possible that the optical detects and general inferiority of the German microscopes 
has something to do with statements like the one cpioted ? The query has presented itself to 
us a dozen times whilst engaged on these papers. If the reader doubts the importance of the 
most accurate adjustment of object-glasses, let him examine the drawings made by the late 
Richard Beck, of the appearance of the Podura-scale as observed with the same objective, with 
varying amount of con-ection for the thin glass cover. 
